Identificador persistente para citar o vincular este elemento: https://accedacris.ulpgc.es/jspui/handle/10553/154911
Campo DC Valoridioma
dc.contributor.authorMarin-Garcia, Ignacioen_US
dc.contributor.authorGuerra, Victoren_US
dc.contributor.authorRabadan, J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorPerez-Jimenez, Rafaelen_US
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-13T08:02:38Z-
dc.date.available2026-01-13T08:02:38Z-
dc.date.issued2025en_US
dc.identifier.otherScopus-
dc.identifier.urihttps://accedacris.ulpgc.es/jspui/handle/10553/154911-
dc.description.abstractOptical Wireless Communication (OWC) technologies are emerging as promising complements to radio-frequency systems, offering high bandwidth, spatial confinement, and license-free operation. Within this domain, Visible Light Communication (VLC) and Optical Camera Communication (OCC) represent two distinct paradigms with divergent performance and security profiles. While VLC leverages LED-photodiode links for high-speed data transfer, OCC exploits ubiquitous image sensors to decode modulated light patterns, enabling flexible but lower-rate communication. Despite their potential, both remain vulnerable to various attacks, including eavesdropping, jamming, spoofing, and privacy breaches. This work applies—and extends—the Risk Matrix (RM) methodology to systematically evaluate the security of VLC and OCC across reconnaissance, denial, and exploitation phases. Unlike prior literature, which treats VLC and OCC separately and under incompatible threat definitions, we introduce a unified, domain-specific risk framework that maps empirical channel behavior and attack feasibility into a common set of impact and likelihood indices. A normalized risk rank (NRR) is proposed to enable a direct, quantitative comparison of heterogeneous attacks and technologies under a shared reference scale. By quantifying risks for representative threats—including war driving, Denial of Service (DoS) attacks, preshared key cracking, and Evil Twin attacks—our analysis shows that neither VLC nor OCC is intrinsically more secure; rather, their vulnerabilities are context-dependent, shaped by physical constraints, receiver architectures, and deployment environments. VLC tends to concentrate confidentiality-driven exposure due to optical leakage paths, whereas OCC is more sensitive to availability-related degradation under adversarial load. Overall, the main contribution of this work is the first unified, standards-aligned, and empirically grounded risk-assessment framework capable of comparing VLC and OCC on a common security scale. The findings highlight the need for technology-aware security strategies in future OWC deployments and demonstrate how an adapted RM methodology can identify priority areas for mitigation, design, and resource allocation.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofPhotonicsen_US
dc.sourcePhotonics[EISSN 2304-6732],v. 12 (12), (Diciembre 2025)en_US
dc.subject.otherOccen_US
dc.subject.otherOwcen_US
dc.subject.otherRisk Matrixen_US
dc.subject.otherSecurity Assessmenten_US
dc.subject.otherVlcen_US
dc.titleVisible Light Communication vs. Optical Camera Communication: A Security Comparison Using the Risk Matrix Methodologyen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/Articleen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/photonics12121201en_US
dc.identifier.scopus105025903310-
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-8743-8528-
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-6264-7577-
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-9994-4495-
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0002-8849-592X-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid26633930600-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid55650664600-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid6701924182-
dc.contributor.authorscopusid56044417600-
dc.identifier.eissn2304-6732-
dc.identifier.issue12-
dc.relation.volume12en_US
dc.investigacionIngeniería y Arquitecturaen_US
dc.type2Artículoen_US
dc.utils.revisionen_US
dc.date.coverdateDiciembre 2025en_US
dc.identifier.ulpgcen_US
dc.contributor.buulpgcBU-TELen_US
dc.description.sjr0,457
dc.description.jcr2,1
dc.description.sjrqQ2
dc.description.jcrqQ2
dc.description.scieSCIE
item.fulltextCon texto completo-
item.grantfulltextopen-
crisitem.author.deptGIR IDeTIC: División de Fotónica y Comunicaciones-
crisitem.author.deptIU para el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación en Comunicaciones (IDeTIC)-
crisitem.author.deptGIR IDeTIC: División de Fotónica y Comunicaciones-
crisitem.author.deptIU para el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación en Comunicaciones (IDeTIC)-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Señales y Comunicaciones-
crisitem.author.deptGIR IDeTIC: División de Fotónica y Comunicaciones-
crisitem.author.deptIU para el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación en Comunicaciones (IDeTIC)-
crisitem.author.deptDepartamento de Señales y Comunicaciones-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-6264-7577-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-9994-4495-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-8849-592X-
crisitem.author.parentorgIU para el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación en Comunicaciones (IDeTIC)-
crisitem.author.parentorgIU para el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación en Comunicaciones (IDeTIC)-
crisitem.author.parentorgIU para el Desarrollo Tecnológico y la Innovación en Comunicaciones (IDeTIC)-
crisitem.author.fullNameGuerra Yanez, Victor-
crisitem.author.fullNameRabadán Borges, José Alberto-
crisitem.author.fullNamePérez Jiménez, Rafael-
Colección:Artículos
Adobe PDF (1,28 MB)
Vista resumida

Google ScholarTM

Verifica

Altmetric


Comparte



Exporta metadatos



Los elementos en ULPGC accedaCRIS están protegidos por derechos de autor con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.